Use Cases

Charlie Mead:

Charlie: Work at NCI, involved w
HL7
... considerable interest at NCI and HL7 to address problems of
interoperability across delivery
... and HC and basic science
... agreed that use cases must be grounded
... HL7 came to realize that specs need to be limited to
interoperability

<George> such as an RDFS or
OWL version of CCD?

Charlie: HL7 has interest in this
semantic space
... on the wire formatting; there is immediate interest
... CDISC has been focussed on clinical trial, but have also
been building repositories
... perfect storm of opportunities between their requirements
and semweb
... hope for active participation among HL7, CDISC, semweb

Lena(?): Even bigger gap between clinical and
research

scribe: is there intention to
bridge this too?

Charlie Mead: Yes, translational medicine.

<mscottm> Lena pointed out
that there is a bigger gap between clinical research and wet
lab biology research (compared to clinical trial and clinical
research)

scribe: NIH perfect example of
data used in both cinical care and research domains
... incredibly complicated. Example is cohorts.
... sounds siimple, but it's not. Barriers are semantic
primarily!

<Anita> Sorry what are
'cohorts'?

cohorts of patients in clinical trials

Lena: Data are proprietary, we
cannot get our hands on the data

<ericP> q

<mscottm> cohorts are the
patients that have been aggregated for study according to
inclusion and exclusion criteria

ericP: i2b2 has started down this
path of using existing deployed ehr systems and leveraging
semantics off of that
... infrastructure is there to exchange thru i2b2
... there is a whole space where semantics are not quite
deployed
... but not too far away. Controlled vocabs are
hierarchical
... can turn a sparl query into a large i2b2 query

Lena: But no guarantees, creating
another silo here??
... too much on our plates? Have to think how to do

ericP: We must work faster to be
future-proof

Scott: U. Colombia has imported
some microarray data from kidney transplants
... success or failure of transplant
... also U. Pitt has RDF data w sparql endpoints
... also Sage, spoke to John Wilbanks who set up meeting in
2000

Scott: Sage working on pretty
much all the same goals
... talking w FDA, comparitor arm data
... maybe engage Sage w our tech and people

<boycer> clarification - the
data is de-identified clinical reports from one month of
hospital care at University of PIttsburgh Medical center.
Intention is for NLP research. We created an index of semantic
concepts present in the reports but researchers would still
have to request the data through a data sharing agreement.

Scott: John Wilbanks,
consent-to-research permit(?) from patients
... notion of co-define privacy attributes for data and consent
agreements
... so can reason over the legalese
... seems like a very promising areas, goes hand-in-hand w
social approach
... helping to create conditions where clinical data become
more available
... IMI project, would like to see IMI people also participate
in hcls

<Anita> Are we discussing use
cases in this call? I have a few I'd like to offer up

ericP: New charter
... developed use cases before the charter, some of them
listed
... charter similar to last one, but calls out access-control
policy
... and NIH, HL7, euro, etc

<boycer> Anita: I also sent
one to the pub-sem-web list this morning but did not see it
post---did you see it

ericP: If people have any good
contacts w Euro or Asian versions of NIH - please help

ericP: Certain amount of new work
in new charter, Scott has brag sheet
... also Pistoia and groups w pharma and vendors to
pharma
... can take their use cases
... ties back to how to keep attention; impose more rigor in
picking and reporting work

Michel: What trying to achieve;
different to do research article than write notes
... partners. Outside of hcls, bring to table or bring things
to the table.
... impact of the work. Varies from science to training in
tech
... all these are metrics to evaluate projects

<George> template looks great
- i'm on the queue

Lena(?)

<mscottm> Anita is speaking
(from point of view of Scientific Discourse task force)

Anita: Five sets of use cases up,
starting year and a half ago
... 1 id of components of medical text for key claims and
evidence
... mark up so that there is a single hypothesis
... compare hyps based on evidence, etc
... Impact, NLP and markup, does it scale?
... high risk , high payoff
... 2) collaboration for biomed, lower risk
... 3) ...
... 3) is academic

ericP: How do you compare use
case value?

Anita: Up to participants.

ericP: "I can work on five
different things."

Michel: Understanding what the
(meta?) values are, to judge among use cases